The clock struck 13 on January 20, Donald Trump is the president of the United States, and episode one of Intercepted is here. Intercept co-founder Glenn Greenwald and Editor-in-Chief Betsy Reed join Jeremy Scahill for a discussion on the crazy apocalyptic present in which we find ourselves. They break down Trump’s attacks on the media, that insane speech he gave at the CIA, and the state of the Democratic Party. Naomi Klein sends in a dispatch from the Women’s March against the Trump-Pence administration about what’s at stake for people who are not men. Jeremy goes deep into the secretive world of Seymour Hersh’s kitchen and shoots the shit with the legendary, Pulitzer Prize-winning journalist about why he calls Trump a “circuit breaker” for the two-party system. And we hear a spoken-word performance from hip-hop artist Immortal Technique.

Chief Justice John Roberts: Please raise your right hand and repeat after me. I, Donald John Trump, do solemnly swear.

Donald Trump: I, Donald John Trump, do solemnly…

Jeremy Scahill: It was a dreary, cold day in January. And the clocks were striking 13.

DT: The office of president of the United States.

JS: This is Intercepted.

Sean Spicer: This was the largest audience to ever witness an inauguration. Period.

Kellyanne Conway: “Alternative facts to that, but the point remains.”

Chuck Todd: “Wait a minute. Alternative facts?”

DT: There is only America first. America first.

JS: I’m Jeremy Scahill coming to you from the offices of The Intercept in New York City, and I want to welcome you all to the first episode of our new weekly podcast, Intercepted. Now, when Glenn Greenwald, Laura Poitras, and I started The Intercept, our idea was to bring an adversarial news organization that would bring accountability to very important institutions and people.

Barack Obama: We are closing the prison in Guantanamo. We are reforming military commissions and we will pursue a new legal regime to detain terrorists. We are declassifying more information and embracing more oversight of our actions. And we’re narrowing our use of the state’s secret privilege.

JS: And when we started The Intercept, Barack Obama was the president. This was a guy who ran a campaign to be the most transformative president in history, to have the most transparent administration in history. And when this Nobel Peace Prize winner started bombing countries, initiating new covert wars and overt wars, continuing some of Bush’s wars, we held him accountable. We were aggressive. We were nonpartisan and we were fiercely independent in our reporting.

DT: Database is okay and watch list is okay and surveillance is okay. If you don’t mind, I wanna be, I wanna surveil. I want surveillance.

JS: Today we have a billionaire reality TV star who has pledged to operate the United States from a position of power where he believes in America-first policies. Donald Trump pledged to bring back torture. He pledged to fill Guantánamo back up again. Our mission at The Intercept has never been more urgent than it is right now. The reproductive rights of women, the liberty of muslims, the humanity of African-Americans who are facing down against paramilitarized police forces, and police brutality and police killings. All of this. All of these people, all of these communities, all of these issues, are in the crosshairs.

Each week on the show we are going to break down the most urgent developments with the Trump administration. And we’re not just going to hold the Republicans, Trump, and the White House accountable, we’re also going to go after the Democrats. We’re going to go after media organizations and journalists who are not doing their jobs.

[Music Interlude]

JS: So to kick off our first show I’m joined by our editor-in-chief at The Intercept, Betsy Reed, and by my fellow Intercept co-founder, Glenn Greenwald, who is joining us from an undisclosed location in Rio.

Well, there is a tremendous amount to talk about even though Donald Trump’s administration is just days old. I want to start with you Betsy. What’s your take on this moment that we’re in right now, the events of the past week? There’s been a lot of attention paid to Trump’s relationship with the press. You had Sean Spicer and his attacks on the media and also his nonpress conference. It seems to be right now what a lot of media organizations are fixated on.

Betsy Reed: Well I mean on one level I think it’s completely understandable that the media is freaking out because it really is truly shocking what happened in the White House briefing room and Sean Spicer what he said. Just the bald-faced lies. I think the media has a responsibility to call them out and correct them and confront them. There’s no question about that, but at the same time, it’s like I do worry we’re in this sort of cycle of self-obsession in the media. Like the whole news cycle is about the news. When in fact Trump, meanwhile, reinstated the global gag rule which is bringing us back to the Reagan era in terms of you know, blocking funds to any health organizations in other countries that provide abortion services. So I mean …

Glenn Greenwald: Did George Bush have that also? George W. Bush?

BR: Yes. Clinton had rescinded it after Reagan put it in place and then George W. put it back in and then Obama rescinded it. So I mean obviously it’s important for the media to call Trump out when he lies but at the same time we can’t like, lose sight of the very real sort of and rapid policy moves they’re making. Also what they’re doing across the board in terms of climate. Just completely, you know, dismantling all of Obama’s initiatives. It’s incredibly important. And it’s been great actually how that group of hackers has been going in to systematically retrieve and preserve the trove of climate data that could possible be eradicated.

JS: I also think it’s fascinating the way the whole debate at least on the official talk shows this past week was all about the kind of numbers debate. Where Trump was saying there was a million, million and a half people there. Spicer then comes in at his first official presence in front of the press, focuses the whole thing on the number of people who were at Trump’s inauguration, and how historic it was.

But you know, I wanna back up a second regarding this media question. When it became clear that Trump was going to be the president, I started going back and reading some of the primary source material of officials of the National Socialist Party in Germany, of the Nazi party in Germany. Particularly the diaries of Joseph Goebbels who was Hitler’s minister of propaganda. And what’s interesting if you read Goebbels’s writings, they understood the power of the moving image at the time, what was becoming television and of radio. And they really were the first regime in the world to really master this emerging medium. And I think there’s a parallel to what we’re seeing with Trump and Twitter. Trump is basically sending this message everything is fake news that you don’t read on my Twitter feed. And at the same time you have this discussion — are they going to kick the U.S. press corps out of the White House, maybe move them to the old executive office building? What is the Trump’s relationship with the news media going to look like?

Steve Bannon, who ran Breitbart News is a very sophisticated so-called alt-right propagandist. At the same time though I’m not going to hold up Chuck Todd as some beacon of the free press, which he’s trying to make himself out to be. I mean these people were the most bankrupt, soulless, you know, un-independent journalists for so many years. Those journalists that would sit there, those media personalities that would sit there in the White House press room never asking real questions? I mean to me it’s kind of a double whammy. You’ve got terrible, almost worthless, sometimes corporate news organizations with a track record of knowing so little about so much. And then you have this authoritarian vibe that is being unleashed on the news media in this organization. Look at MSNBC. It’s basically — they’re re-litigating the Cold War. They’ll take any bit of unverified or unverifiable bullshit about the Russian hack and slap it up there as breaking news and never correct the record once it’s done.

GG: I mean, this is I think has been the problem for two months now or however long it’s been since the election. Which is everyone has reacted in a very kind of extreme way. Very impulsively, with a lot of emotion, which, as Betsy said earlier, is extremely understandable because there’s a lot of menacing things and seriously scary possibilities on the horizon. At the same time just reacting reflexively is not really a strategy.

I mean whatever else you want to say about the Trump operation, they do have a consistent message. They do have a set of tactics that they use over and over. And so I think to effectively counter that, some thinking has to be done, some breathing, some cogency needs to emerge that I think has really been lacking among Democrats, among the media. Among just the entire political establishment that still has not found their footing in terms of how to respond.

And I’m hoping that this protest, this march over the weekend, will be centering in that way because I think it was the first emboldening and empowering event. It made people feel like they weren’t lost, like they had a kind of voice. And I’m hoping there’s some structured, thoughtful way that these institutions that want to oppose Trump set out about to do it, rather than replicating his insanity and unhinged craziness. And turning everything into a circus, which I think only runs down to his benefit, as understandable as that reaction might be.

BR: I agree with you. But I wonder if both of you are giving Trump too much credit. Do you really think they’re that competent. Is this all part of the plan?

GG: I don’t think Trump is. I mean, If you listen to inaugural address that’s classic Steve Bannon, which was the message that they ultimately won on. The message that they won the Rust Belt on, which was: your jobs have been shipped overseas, the D.C. establishment only cares about billionaires, they’ve forgotten about you, you’re the forgotten people. And we’re going to respond and do things for you. We’re gonna save your jobs, we’re going to make you safe. We’re promising you things that you care about in your life.

That may be a simplistic message, it may be a deceitful one, but it is a message and it’s one they tap into consistently. I don’t think because Trump is some genius Machiavellian but I think there are people who are managing him who have an idea of what they’re doing. And if you want to beat that message there needs to be a counter-message beyond “oh my god, there are red spies under your bed and Putin is Trump’s boyfriend.” And I don’t think there has been that much of a message yet that has been cultivated.

You see Elizabeth Warren and Bernie Sanders sort of trying to urge Democrats to start to focus on one but I don’t think there has been one and I don’t think there’s been a media strategy either for how to deal with this new world beyond just screaming “you’re a liar, you’re a liar” back and forth, over and over, which I think most people are going to end up tuning out. And writing everything off and assuming nothing can be resolved, which I think the Trump White House wants most. Yes, of course Trump is an inept idiot, he’s a clown. He has some talent in entertainment. But no, he’s not some genius. But they do have, his circle has a set of messaging that has proven effective among a certain faction and I don’t think that should be ignored.

JS: I will say first of all they won, and I think that …

BR: Not the popular vote.

JS: They won the election in the United States and they did what they needed to do to achieve their mission which was to take power in this country. I agree with you. I think Trump is a kind of devastating cocktail of incredible arrogance. A very acute sense of how many people in this country are filled with the kind of bigotry, ignorance and hate that makes his message resonate and also an authoritarian. By personality. Everything we’ve heard about this guy both publically and privately indicates that he is a fierce authoritarian. But at the same time who’s winning the battle in the court of public opinion? Trump or the news organizations? He’s forcing them to respond to his news agenda based on whatever the hell he tweets on any given day.

He goes to the CIA with his own ready-made crowd to cheer although some CIA people there did cheer as well. Which you know, there’s a very serious dark part of what happened there at the CIA, which is I think there are elements of the CIA that view the kind of Phoenix Program return as a good thing, the assassination program in Vietnam. Like COINTELPRO, the FBI counterintelligence program that infiltrated dissident groups. But I don’t think we can underestimate Trump’s ability to understand the moment that he’s in in terms of pushing his own agenda forward. I do think it would be a mistake to simply write him off as the Cheeto-in-chief, or this buffoon that somehow … People did that with Bush too. Bush did eight years of pretty substantial damage when everyone thought that he was batting yarn in a backroom while Dick Cheney was running the show.

BR: It’s true but he’s only managed to fill a tiny sliver of the positions that he needs to. I mean he is bumbling along.

JS: I don’t deny a basic level of incompetence. But let’s be clear, they’re outsourcing some of that to lobbyists now that are gonna fill … they’re outsourcing it. I wouldn’t be surprised if he got laborers from China to start filling some of the … No but Trump is also, because of Gen. Mike Flynn, his national security adviser, they’re going to shrink the size, intentionally of the National Security Council and they are going to be doing a gutting of the people that they consider not loyal enough within the national security apparatus. And I think that is causing a lot of concern in the intelligence community They’re going to go for the political purge.

BR: I think if anything is consistent it’s that Trump is highly retaliatory. Is that whenever he perceives he’s been attacked, he lashes back. And I think that’s going to define everything about the administration .

JS: And Glenn, Trump now is getting the the states out of the Trans-Pacific Trade Partnership, the TPP, which a lot of Bernie Sanders supporters were also against these so called free-trade global arrangements that the United States is in. NAFTA, GATT, now the TPP. What’s your read on this? Because I’ve seen a lot of Democrats now saying this is a win for China, it puts America last.

GG: I think this presents this huge question that Betsy was referring to earlier, which is these issues — these trends — they’re not just American, they’re international. They’re really global. There was an article in the New York Times which was really quite good this weekend about the French elections and how the left is dead in France. It’s a competition between Marine Le Pen who’s the Trump candidate and a kind of more established right wing candidate. In the U.K. the left is dead. Corbyn is you know, 30 points behind Theresa May in all the polls, and throughout Europe you’re seeing working class voters who have traditionally supported the left because of unions and because of social programs abandoning them on social grounds but also economic grounds thinking their jobs have been sent overseas and they are the losers in globalization, returning to this nationalistic message.

And TPP is the perfect example of this which is just another horrible trade deal that Barack Obama and Hillary Clinton were behind. She said ultimately with the campaign that she would unravel it or at least fix it. But everyone knew she was actually for it. John McCain came out today saying Trump’s making a mistake and Trump’s out there saying “no more of these trade deals that are sending your jobs away.”

And Bernie Sanders is saying if we’re going to be Democrats, we have to side with the people who are worried about their economic future. And if Democrats instead take the other route, which is because Trump’s doing it we’re going to oppose it, we’re going to try and xenophobically worry about how this is strengthening China. Say that these trade deals are actually good when everyone knows they’re just good for Wall Street. I think it’s only going to worsen this trend. It’s going to make Democrats feel like they’re being clever because they’re attacking Trump from the nationalistic or militaristic and xenophobic right. But I think it’s just going to exacerbate this impression that the Democrats are this party that only cares about corporate American coastal elites. That has been the biggest problem this far and I don’t see Democrats doing much to confront that or examine that, or to figure out how to change that. And that’s what I say, I think Bernie Sanders is, Elizabeth Warren is but not much else.

BR: Yeah and I mean, if Democrats, if the mainstream of the Democratic Party takes that line and attacks him on TPP, unlike Bernie Sanders, it’s also going to drive a massive wedge into the progressive coalition that we just kind of saw come together in this incredibly moving way — the Women’s March. Some people sort of sniped about how it was just about women, but actually it was very inclusive, and broad based and brought in any number of constituencies and groups and races and everything and also it was very sort of grassroots in the whole spirit of it. But if you have, you know, this corporate Democratic elite, you know, attach itself to the pro-free-trade agenda, you’re just going to completely gut the potential, the populist, the real authentic populist potential of that movement we just saw.

JS: And I was in the streets for both the day of the inauguration the protests there. And then also for the Women’s March. One thing that I found interesting — contrasting the vibe of that march on Saturday with the first anti-Trump demonstrations big ones, like in New York and elsewhere — there were a lot of people with the “I’m still with her” signs, the “not my president” [signs], focusing on the issue that Hillary Clinton won the popular vote. You did see some of that in streets this weekend. But it was in the dramatic minority.

There were a lot of people that were there on women’s reproductive rights, on issues of climate change, racial justice issues, indigenous rights, huge contingent of indigenous women were there. Some of them tribal figures from the communities affected by the Dakota Access Pipeline. I think really the elites in the Democratic Party, it’s the weakest position they’ve been at in a very long time. One thing that I’ve noticed for instance, The Democratic Socialists for America, DSA, they really have stepped up their organizing. A lot of young people are mobilizing.

BR: It’s true, I noticed them too.

JS: Bernie Sanders did the most substantial damage to the campaign to demonize the word socialism in generations, decades in this country. And so I think that people who are fed up with the established Democratic Party have their best shot in years to actually go to town, to actually mobilize and organize, and rather than it feeling like this dark ominous era is upon us. I came away from the events, Trump’s speech aside, of inauguration weekend in Washington, D.C., feeling like many people are fired up and it’s not about let’s get Hillary back into the race in four years, it was “what are we going to do right now?”

BR: I think some of the most exciting movements right now are focused not on Washington but on sanctuary cities, where people can actually step up and protect the people who are going to be victimized most harshly by Trump’s policies.

GG: Yeah, my last thought is, just to follow up on that and say I think this is the silver lining of the Trump debacle, the Trump disaster, which is that it does have the potential to recreate for the first time this kind of culture of protest and activism and empowerment which is really potent when it’s galvanized the right way and that has been missing certainly since 9/11, when you know Washington just gained all this power and the population kind of got cowed into this mix of patriotism and bullying and I think that this was this first step. That although for me wasn’t perfect, the fact that it was organic and just very spontaneous and people driven. I think it’s actually one of the first positive, inspiring things that has happened in many months in U.S. politics, certainly since the election.

BR: I obviously agree and it was impossible not to be moved when you’re a part of those crowds. But I do think the main purpose of those marches was sort of solidarity building and you know, just trying to restore our unbelievably depressed morale at this moment. And I think it really served it’s purpose well there.

I don’t think that the marches were particularly successful in kind of convincing anyone else who doesn’t already agree with everybody who’s in the street, that like there’s something wrong with Trump. And in fact you saw, all over the media, the social media networks, a lot of Trump supporters were kind of complaining: “What are they doing? What are these women complaining about?” The fact that there wasn’t a clear set of demands and clear message actually made it look to those people who were looking at it from the outside like it was really just about being upset that we didn’t get our way and stamping our feet that we didn’t get our way in the election. That’s how it’s perceived. I’m not saying that’s legitimate, but you know, I do think we have to think going forward in a broader strategic way about how we can kind of build something that will grow the ranks of this movement rather than just kind of making ourselves feel better. Which is important, I don’t mean to diminish the importance of that.

JS: And I think there’s a clear contrast, and some of this is generational, and some of it is racial and some of it is class. But there’s a huge divide between the ever-aging leadership of the Democratic Party on Capitol Hill and people that are at the forefront of mobilizing in new ways. Whether it’s young black activists or it’s indigenous activists. And I do think there was education happening in the streets. Because I think the diversity that was present there did internal education for a lot of people about the issues of what others and what they find important.

But I would say contrast that kind of vibe with stale gray Washington and look at who votes to confirm all these horrid people that Trump has put up in his cabinet. Those people should be held accountable for voting for pro torture Mike Pompeo, pro-privatization of schools Betsy DeVos, and the list goes on and on and on from there, climate change deniers, etc. Politicians who play the game of this is just how politics work and we have to give him a chance, they’re not actually part of resisting much of anything, any more than somebody on MSNBC is part of the resistance because they put forward this “Russia is hiding behind every corner in our society.”

Well I want to thank my colleagues Betsy Reed and Glenn Greenwald for joining us.

BR: Thank you Jeremy.

Protesters: We won’t go away. Welcome to your first day. We won’t go away. Welcome to your first day. We won’t go away. Welcome to your first day.

JS: The weekend of the inauguration I was on the streets both on the day of the inauguration as well as on Saturday during the massive Women’s March. And I was joined by my friend Naomi Klein, who is a writer, an author, and a journalist.

Naomi Klein: I think it’s wonderful that the first mass action is a women’s march and you have all these sort of ridiculous debates of “Why isn’t it an everyone march?” And it’s like, I think it’s great this debate is being aired because we have to understand that yes they’re coming for everyone and everyone’s going to impacted, but not everyone’s going to be impacted in the same way. There are specificities here. There are people who are way more vulnerable. And we can’t have the attitude that we’re only going to focus on our issue. Because that would be way too weak, right?

Protesters: We are the popular vote. We are the popular vote.

NK: I’ve been hearing sort of a worrying message of like it’s so outrageous. The hypocrisies are so intense that obviously people are going to see this. That Trump ran as champion of the working man, and he’s going to stand up to the corruption and billionaires in Washington. And then just fills his administration with them. There’s … some people seem to be expecting that there’s going to a spontaneous revolt of Trump’s space. And, you know, what scares me is that as the economic facade falls away, the racism, the weaponizing of race, and the weaponizing of gender becomes all the more important because that’s all they have to offer. The economic stuff was obviously a sham. But they’re going to feed that to their base to make sure they don’t lose them. What we need to understand is how misogyny and racism are used to advance this agenda.

Protesters: This is what a feminist looks like. Tell me what a feminist looks like. This is what a feminist looks like.

NK: Hatred of women is a bright thread running through this administration. It’s not incidental, you know. There are key figures surrounding Trump, and Trump himself, who have been accused of sexual assault, abuse of their partners. It’s an epidemic, right? When you think about the people who are, we forget about, there in the background, like Roger Ailes there in the background, turned his whole workplace into … This is like the White House as frat house. I mean it is so disgusting. That’s a good reason to march.

Protesters: Donald Trump has got to go.

JS: That was Naomi Klein, journalist, author, activist at the Women’s March on Washington. In a minute I’m going to be chatting with the legendary journalist Sy Hersh. And what he has to say about Trump may surprise you.

[music interlude]

JS: In trying to dissect what’s happening in the world of Donald Trump’s relation to the CIA, I thought it would be really fascinating to sit down with the legendary investigative journalist, Seymour Hersh, who is of course a Pulitzer Prize winner. He broke the story of the My Lai Massacre during the war in Vietnam, he broke the Abu Ghraib torture story. He did several hard hitting investigative pieces when the Bush administration came into power about the way that they were expanding assassination operations.

And for those of you who are not entirely familiar with Sy Hersh’s career, in the 1970s, when Gerald Ford was president, after the impeachment and resignation of Richard Nixon, Sy Hersh, who at the time was a reporter for The New York Times, had revealed the fact that the CIA was operating domestically. and was engaged in illegal spying. And Dick Cheney while he was in the Ford administration in 1970s, tried to get the FBI to go after Sy Hersh. In fact he wanted Sy Hersh to be indicted for espionage.

Sound familiar?

We are now in a situation where we just had a Democratic president who presided over a war against whistleblowers, which is in many ways is a war against a free press, where a charge of espionage was used to go after people who were whistleblowers.

Well this week, I went over to Sy’s house and we sat down at his kitchen and it wasn’t so much an interview. It was more that I wanted to shoot the shit with this incredible reporter who has faced down with authoritarian administrations before, in what is really a conversation between two journalists. I began by asking Sy to give me his assessment of what Trump’s election and his emerging administration, what we should make of it.

Seymour Hersh: I can, I can play high-end or low-end. Let me give you the, the high-end. He’s a circuit breaker. You know? Here we are, we’ve got, we’ve had I think you can say for the past three or four decades, the oligarchs have been running everything and these guys are simply cutting out the middlemen. Those little greedy congressmen and senators who want their hands out. So they’re just cutting out the middlemen and he’s naming people to the cabinet jobs that have one thing, they’re all very very rich. They’re all multi-millionaires. Their career is over, they’re not using, they’re not gonna use the, the cabinet job they have to run for president for, or run for anything for, so this in a way, there’s no reason for them to disagree with the boss. I mean not to disagree with the boss. They have nothing to lose. You could argue that. And that he might have a new relationship with Putin and that’s the high-end.

I think increasingly as you look at it, I mean that’s not going to be the reality. But the idea of somebody you know, breaking things away, you know, and raising grave doubts about the viability of the party system, particularly the Democratic Party, are not a bad idea. That’s something, we could build on that in the future. But we have to figure out what to do in the next few years.

So there’s a high-end thing where you can say he’s such an outlier, that who knows what’s going to happen? Um, but you know, and then you could do the other side, you know. I don’t tell you what history. You have to go back into the ’30s, the first thing you do is destroy the media, which he can do, he’s going to intimidate ‘em. And then once you do the media and there’s gonna be, I can tell you my friends on the inside have already told me there’s going to be a major increase in surveillance. If you don’t have Signal, you better get Signal. If you don’t have one of those devices that makes it very difficult for people to track you.

JS: You’re talking about the end-to-end encrypted apps, like Signal and …

SH: Yeah, well Signal’s one of the better ones that they really can’t do much with.

JS: Yeah, yeah.

SH: I mean it’s Snowden’s means of communication. And so there’s also, also devices you can get that prevent you from being tracked. There’s also devices that can detect malware. So all that’s … There’s a downside to it. I understand that they’re going to be doing some purging. People on the inside who are suspect. And on more than just suspect left, suspect as being Islamist. I mean, really far out stuff. Really, stuff like that going on. I don’t think the notion of democracy is ever going to be as tested as it’s going to be now.

JS: Well, I mean, and Trump, the day after his inauguration goes to the CIA and gives that speech in front of the wall of the stars of the fallen agents. What did you make of it? And he, and he was mostly obsessed with the size of his crowd but what did you make of that first meeting, official meeting of the CIA?

SH: Ha. I can’t begin to tell you. Well he’s obviously going to remake the CIA. And he’s got some basis for thinking that there was, you know, the case. I don’t want to get too much into what I’m reporting but I can tell you the case about Russia. There’s a much simpler explanation for what happened.

JS: The real thing that I wanted to ask about here is: does Trump have a point when he says that these were leaks intended to undermine his credibility and damage him?

SH: Sure.

JS: That came from the CIA or other parts of the intelligence?

SH: Of course. There’s no question. I mean you see Brennan is speaking out, even now that he’s out of office, still speaking out. And that’s sort of, we haven’t seen that before.

JS: Well Brennan’s primary, you know primary thing that he claims he’s speaking out about is Trump’s use of the words nazis to describe people in the intelligence community.

SH: But before that he was speaking out. But look, the road is open for alternative journalism in a way that it hasn’t been in a long time. Because I don’t — I don’t think —mMy view of the way major media treated the thing with the Russian thing and the Putin wire tag, the hacking, is they were hectoring. They were just using it to hector. They didn’t do reporting.

And the real story was the extent to which the White House was going and permitting this kind of stuff to go, and permitting the agency to go public with assessments. What does an assessment mean? It’s not a national intelligence estimate. If you had a real estimate you would have five or six dissents, people saying, ‘cause I can tell you right now. One time they said 17 agencies all agreed. Oh really? The Coast Guard and the Air Force, they all agreed on it? And it was outrageous and nobody did that story.

JS: Even in their own summary that they released, the NSA’s level of confidence, as reported in that was a full degree lower than that of Clapper and his crowd. And on what issue?

SH: An assessment is simply an opinion. It’s not — if they had a fact, they’d give you. An assessment is just that. It’s a belief.

JS: I mean what, how, how do you think journalists should be operating right now, given the fact that the first White House press briefing by Sean Spicer — no questions allowed — leaves the room, and the fact that they’re talking about ejecting them from the, from the White House, sticking them in the old executive building. But also just the open “fuck you” to the press that we hear every single day?

SH: You know it’s interesting because the press is an easy target. We always are. Everyone wants to hate us like lawyers you know. All the lawyer jokes. But the truth is, and this is the campaign theme he had about the press and there was a significant percentage of people don’t want to believe the press. But the truth is the First Amendment is an amazing thing and if you start trampling the way they, I hope they don’t do it that way, it would be really counter productive. Um, he’ll be in trouble.

JS: What do you make of what we know about the emerging relationship between Trump and the CIA? Based on who he has around him, the kinds of policies that they’ve advocated and the personality we see, you know, Trump embody. What is Trump’s CIA going to look like?

SH: Oh of course, who knows? The real answer is you know, how the hell do I know? But you know.

JS: But let’s remember too, Trump said I want, I love waterboarding, he wants to stuff Guantánamo back up again.

SH: Right.

JS: You know, is that just a reality TV showman saying these things?

SH: I don’t know. He also said he was going to do this, this, this. And his first day in office he didn’t do it. I don’t know. Look, we had a Democratic president for eight years that couldn’t … Every day, he did what? He escalated in Afghanistan? You know, again you say how are we doing there? How’s it going? How’s the war on terror going now? Since we started. How’s it been going for 16 years. Are there fewer opposition guys. How’s it going? He may surprise us and look at it and say woah, but I don’t think so. But I’m willing to look at it. Because as I said, circuit breaker’s the word. We’ve never had anything like this before. But I wish he was a little different.

JS: I always thought there’d come a point where Trump will decide, I’m gonna hand the running of the White House over to my sons, and I’m gonna go to back to doing … I’m not sure the guy understands anything about the constitution.

SH: Ha.

JS: But I do think, the combination of Pence’s record and Trump, what we see as Trump’s nature, I do think, I think you’re right to say we don’t know what the fuck’s going to happen. But we’ve seen some pretty bad indicators from the telegraph in here that they, you know, Trump does seem to want to bring back some of the worst components of the Bush-Cheney apparatus, combined with the fact that Mr. Transformative Nobel Peace Prize-winning-constitutional-law-scholar-Obama, basically sold liberals on the idea that we can whack people around the world, that drones are good, that we can engage in all of these little twilight wars, covert operations. Obama cleaned up a lot of the Cheney doctrine for his own people.

SH: How dare you attack him? How dare you? You’re right about him. Before, he did not change the basic structure. I think two days in office, his first executive action was to say I’m gonna shut down Guantánamo.

JS: But I do think that it’s possible Trump will try to transfer some of the people that Obama had prosecuted through the civil court system in this country on terrorism charges down to Gitmo. And I’m hearing that concern from the lawyers that represent prisoners at Gitmo.

SH: What are we doing in this country? What the hell, where are we going? I don’t know. I mean it’s — look it’s good for you. You’re, you’re intensely involved in a news service that’s going to get much more attention now. I’m watching it more and more and more and more and I’m not alone. It’s good for you guys, don’t knock it. A little adversity, a little end of democracy, you know. Just communicate with Signal, that’s all.

JS: I mean, I know what you’re saying but I also. I am really concerned about the surveillance stuff, I’m concerned that there’s a …

SH: That’s the word. That’s the word. That’s the word I was hoping you would bring up.

JS: Surveillance?

SH: Yes, that’s going to be the real issue.

JS: Oh I mean…

SH: I mean don’t go over the top. It doesn’t mean you don’t do what you do.

JS: No, no, no. What I’m saying though, just to give you an example and I’d like to hear your thoughts on this: We focus a lot on the NSA and the NSA’s collection abilities, the ability to get into people’s data, their phones, their computers, etc. Even now our smart appliances, your refrigerator, what have you. The DEA for instance, Drug Enforcement Agency, is one of the most pathological violators of privacy and flagrant violation of the law and Constitution. These guys don’t care about warrants, etc. They’ll use stuff that’s supposed to be all close-held, no access for use in domestic operations. DEA forever has been tapping into systems that are meant for foreign espionage stuff, have nothing to do with what they’re doing inside the U.S. or even outside of the U.S. in some cases. With someone like Trump though at the helm …

I mean Obama allowed so much of this stuff to go on, maybe permitted or authorized some of it, maybe just looked the other way. But with Trump and some of the people that he has, and his really thin-skinned ability to respond to criticism, or to take criticism, I’m concerned that they’re going to use this stuff as a domestic weapon — the surveillance stuff as a domestic weapon. I mean I know, I mentioned it in the book “Blackwater” about what the FBI and the CIA wanted to do to you. Breaking, going after you, fabricating stuff, breaking in. Our phones, our computers are the digital equivalent of breaking into your files now.

SH: I’ll …

JS: Except not all of your medical records and everything else are on that. And your texts with your girlfriend or whoever.

SH: Well to that I normally would say boohoo, okay. That’s the price of life. Hold on a second. I’ll match you though. I‘ll match you one, I’ll tell you one. I have reason to believe that when Gonzales was Attorney General.

JS: Alberto Gonzales.

SH: Yes. In 2005 maybe for a year or two. There were cases in which there was tough cases of people we didn’t like, people we thought could maybe be having some connection to a money ring, you know, theoretically drugs or terrorism. And they didn’t have the case.

And so NSA has everything. And so there were cases where they went hunting. They got the NSA to pull up some months worth of gmails or phone conversations of a guy that they’re trying to indict. And they found a conversation, they went to the person that had the conversation, pretended they had a confidential informant. This is what the DEA does all the time. They had a confidential informant.

JS: They call it parallel construction.

SH: And turn a witness that they didn’t have until they went to look at it. Now there you’re really talking. Now we can have the Fourth Amendment violation, now we’re talking about the Fifth Amendment — the right of self defense. Zowee! Zowee! So anything’s possible. Anything’s possible. So we’re in a new world. And it’s a new paradigm I guess you know.

JS: Well they use it like a time—what you’re saying, this is something that we’ve seen worn out, not just in the Snowden docs but also from people who’ve worked on these programs. The passive collection of all this data. You know, the vast majority of people, no one’s ever going to look at that. No one’s going to care what phone call you had or email you had when you show up on the radar of the right person or wrong person depending on how you look at it. They can go back and it’s like a time machine.

SH: Well, we know that.

JS: Right, so with Obama we saw how that was used globally. Within the United States, the combination of that platform with what we see of Trump’s personality? I’m just saying I’m concerned that we’re gonna see a sort of modern version of you know, the enemies list that Nixon had running and Hoover type shit.

SH: But maybe it’s, you know, I’m not Little Mary Sunshine — this is not a Little Mary Sunshine conversation — but Trump also feels victimized by leaks and secondhand stuff in the hotels and you know that stuff.

JS: The golden shower stuff.

SH: Whatever, that stuff. He must feel very victimized by that side of security. And you know there’s nothing like somebody who’s been victimized, maybe there’s a chance he won’t want it. Why not?

JS: Him personally, Sy? Okay, maybe. Look, he’s got some gangsters that are going to become very prominent in the corridors of some of these intelligence agencies.

SH: Was anybody more of a gangster than some of the leading people who’ve conducted the wars we’ve had? We’ve had gangsters all of our life in our society. And they, some of them were senators and some of them were, you know, secretaries of defense, were some murderous murderous people. I’m not, I’m not making a case … I hear what you’re saying. I’m just saying I’m worried. I have to be really worried. I was joking. You know i was joking saying that all the marches in the world aren’t going to move him out of office. But let’s just see.

JS: Boredom might though.

SH: Let’s just see. Let’s just see. You never know. You never know about things, and there’s some things …

JS: I would love to be wrong about all of this stuff.

SH: You don’t have to be wrong, just be wrong about a few things that you know, just be wrong that he may see the world in a business sense. And look, God, I was appalled by the appointments in the cabinet. Just appalled. I mean what? What? But you don’t know. You don’t know. There’s not much I don’t think.

JS: But what’s your advice to journalists? What should journalists be doing during this time? I don’t mean me, I just mean in general. What do you think news organizations, you said before, get up and fuck it, leave the room. How should journalists cover this administration?

SH: They’re not going to do that.

JS: I know they won’t but how do you think journalists should cover this administration?

SH: They should not let them bully them. They should not be bullied by a press secretary who behaves so egregiously in a way that’s so contentious as he did. They should not accept it. They should make it plain. And if he wants to send them off to the executive office building or to the State Department or on the street. Just go. And minimize the reporting except be there to nail everything he does that doesn’t live up to his own words. You still have the press. He’s not going to take the press away from you.

JS: Well he just goes on Twitter and says it’s all lies. And you, I mean he could be sitting in the room with us and say we’re actually sitting on a spaceship on Mars right now. And you and I say, “No, we’re sitting in Sy Hersh’s house.” And he would say, “No, you’re not.” And we say “Well we’re videotaping this, everyone’s going to see it.” And he’d say, “Well that’s fake news.”

SH: You know, but they do enough about it — the press. The trouble is you know we’ve got a different press these days. And it’s changed so much.

JS: But don’t you think that we’ve crossed some sort of a … we have crossed some sort of, into some different dimension now with the sort of post-truth.

SH: Yeah. And so I think that we might see better reporting. As I said, it’s gonna be good for opposition. Most people I think there’s gonna be more political activism. I think the Democratic Party, I just hope it doesn’t blow up and, you know, if they stick to the old way, they’re gonna blow it up and then you’re gonna make it easier for Republicans. You don’t want a split right now. Isn’t that terrible?

JS: You don’t smell a whiff of fascism right now?

SH: What do you mean whiff? When you attack the press the way they’re attacking. I just don’t know if there’s the …

JS: Sorry I’m trying to reconcile, you saying I don’t know it may not be that bad. I mean I get it, it’s responsible to say you don’t know what’s going to happen yet.

SH: But I’m saying also this …

JS: He overtly has a pretty authoritarian fascist aura.

SH: But no. The attack on the press is straight out, it’s national socialism. But do I think he knows that? Do I think he knows the history? No, I don’t think so. I don’t think he knows, you know, he’s not dumb. He’s not a dumb man. But I don’t think he’s at all interested in learning anything. It’s not clear he’s learned anything since he’s even been … I mean, the speech he gave at the inauguration was bereft of any sign of — it was lame. It was not … and the words, we’re talking about a seventh, eighth grade level here. I mean, plain words. That’s okay. Lincoln used plain words. Lincoln was very … you didn’t get him into a sophisticated …

JS: But this business of immediately we take off the women’s page, the LGBTQ page, the climate page, we shut down the Interior Department, shut down these Twitter accounts.

SH: You know, Jeremy, let’s let it happen, that’s all I can say.

JS: I’m trying to not let it happen.

SH: But no, but you can’t stop it. Let’s just see, that’s what I’m saying. Let’s just see.

JS: But whose, who do you think has his ear? Steve Bannon, uh, Flynn, Mattis. I mean who?

SH: Well I’ll tell you one person who doesn’t is the chief of staff. I mean he’s not going to know what’s going on. But that’s probably not so unusual. Look, I’m just not ready to say, I’m not ready to say the roof is, you know I’m not crying yet, I do know the big worry would be surveillance for me. Not personally because you know I do what I do.

JS: Surveillance of who?

SH: Surveillance of, general increase, dramatic increase, in domestic surveillance. Dramatic increase and continuing to single out Muslims which is crazy and continuing to talk about a war. I just, I just want to see what happens.

Don’t start letting your worry about tomorrow affect what you write today. That’s all. You know, there’s a lot out there. So I think the alternative medias are gonna have a little bit of a wave and be more important in the next three, four years. ‘Cause I just don’t think the major papers are up to it. I just don’t, I didn’t see it. I didn’t see what they did. The way they behaved on the Russia stuff was outrageous. They all just ran for briefings and they, I’m talking about in the news pages. And Trump absolutely, I’m sorry to tell you, he has a case. They were just so willing to believe stuff. And when the heads of intelligence give them that two-page summary of the stuff that the allegations, instead of attacking the CIA for doing that, which is what I would have done, my story is: are you kidding me? They’re taking it to a guy who’s going to be president in a couple of days, they’re giving him this kind of stuff and they think this is somehow going to make the world better? It’s going to make him go nuts — would make me go nuts. So I look at it that way you know. Maybe it isn’t that hard to make him go nuts. That’s …

JS: But that’s what I was talking about earlier. There’s this, there was this incredible … It’s almost like sea monkeys. You know those things, you put them in this powder and then they turn into these little things. It’s like all of a sudden, CIA it the greatest thing in the world and how dare you question the pronouncements of the … This is coming from the Democrats, from MSNBC. It’s like you know all of a sudden, there was no Iraq War, there’s not lying, there’s no history of the CIA. It’s just these are our brave spies that are keeping us safe from Russia.

SH: And I would have made, me, I would have made Brennan into a buffoon. A yapping buffoon in the last few days. Instead, they … everything is reported seriously. So there’s a lot of you know, it’s not so easy you know. You got a hothead as president who doesn’t think through and so let’s just see.

I agree with you. I’m not disagreeing with you about the need. I just think from your point of view, and I know this is what we’re talking about, this is all manna. It just means you guys have to do more of it and more people will pay attention to you and more people will take it seriously.

Alright listen we’ve been doing this for three days.

JS: Alright, well you know, have fun moving back to Russia. Thanks, Sy.

SH: Goodbye.

JS: That was the Pulitzer Prize-winning journalist Sy Hersh. We were in the kitchen of his home in Washington, D.C. Before we end the show today I wanted to share with you some spoken word from my friend, the hip-hop artist Felipe Andres Coronel, also known as Immortal Technique.

Immortal Technique:

So check it, it goes like this:

Imagine the word of God without religious groupies

Imagine the savior born in a Mexican hooptie

Persecuted single mother in a modern manger

You’d crucify him again like a fucking stranger

Tears of the anger are worth more than diamonds or rubies

Imagine being locked up since juvie

Imagine changing your life and still going out like Tookie

Imagine people talking shit when they never knew me

Imagine a movie that depicted the pain in your life

Like them kids in Afghanistan chasing a kite

For most of the world that’s what it’s like

Imagine if the person you suppose to love for the rest of your life

Is set to marry someone else at the end of the night

They say you fight the greatest jihad in your heart and your mind

And fight the hardest when you start from behind

So I dreamed the impossible all the time

Fuck a Masonic design—America’s future is mine

Repeat that to yourself cause if our culture’s a crime

Them numbers tatted on your arm aren’t too far behind

They can only conquer you after they murder your mind

So rise up, motherfucker, like the sign of the times

I feel my body weakening but my spirit is fine

Ready to go to war with devils at the drop of a dime

And fight with my rebel army until the stars are aligned

Cause Nostradamus was a white man’s prophet

Who predicated European supremacist logic

Because the pilgrims and the conquistador columns

Killed more innocent people than Hitler and Stalin

So I guess the fortune-teller skipped an antichrist or two

Brother, give this to the OG’s doing life with you

And pray for the problems with the pope psychology

So the Vatican will offer an apology

For what?

For destroying the people’s liberation theology

Snatching the spirit of Jesus from people in poverty

Business decisions like keeping people in prisons

But had the opposite effect: incarcerating religion

That type of crooked politics exposed on a populace

Is obvious if you read the Northwood documents

But forget the compliments for what I recorded

And live for revolution instead of always dying for it

Thank you very much.

JS: The words of Immortal Technique. That does it for episode one of Intercepted. Please tell your friends, your family, your colleagues and well, even your enemies, to subscribe to the show. Visit theintercept.com/podcasts to find out more. Intercepted is a production of First Look Media and The Intercept, and it’s distributed by Panoply. Our producer is Jack D’Isidoro and our executive producer is Leital Molad. Rick Kwan mixed the show. Our music was composed by the great DJ Spooky. Until next week, I’m Jeremy Scahill.

We depend on the support of readers like you to help keep our nonprofit newsroom strong and independent. Join Us

I was so pleased to hear “music by DJ Spooky” at the end. Man, I’ve been digging him since the mid-90s. If you see this Spooky, remember those shows you did with Robin Rimbaud of Scanner, back in like ’97? I got to talking to you guys at the SF show, and I’ll always remember how kind and real you were. You’re the perfect Intercept DJ.

Obviously, none of you have ever lived with a serious abuser. Trump and Pence show TYPICAL behavior of severe abusers. It’s gaslighting and physical abuse at its best. All of their behavior is true abuse. Pence is not less of an abuser because he is the quiet type of abuser, Trump is a proud abuser. Both are abusers. They are conditioning the world to accept their abuse. Soon we will have a “controlled democracy” Pinochet style. I don’t doubt he makes all US govt employees wear some kind of para military outfit. These two are true traitors. They are taking a wrecking ball to our government and economy. In all of the chatter about them gutting the EPA, nobody (ever) talks about the nuclear contamination that is in every state, which has severe very long term implications.
Trump and Pence are implementing “bureaucratic authoritarianism” to use a social science term, which always proves to be economically, culturally and socially disastrous on anyone that is not in the elite class.
Americans better find their courage and be willing to engage our elected officials and take to the streets cause these two traitors are intent on destroying our country.

Cheering hackers that are “saving climate change data”? You have got to be kidding me! If you want a copy of “science” produced under the Obama administration I’ll send you a paper copy of all the science behind the EPA’s Clean Power Plan. The one that would cost a trillion dollars and gives us a 0.032 degree f reduction in the increase of average global temperature 10 years form now. You can have it and guard it with your life – while the rest of the world consigns it to the dust bin of history!

So Glenn Greenwald only seems interested in protecting Putin. Nobody chimed in or commented that our entire national security team is convinced Russia hacked the election for Putin. The Sec of State is set to make billions for Exxon in Russia and Glenn thinks its all an MSNBC conspiracy trying to scare Americans that Russian spies are hiding under every bed. Too much Snowden going on Glenn.

I doubt Glenn’s interest is in protecting Putin, but rather to not propagate the intelligence community’s unsubstantiated claims of Russian hacking to get Trump elected. It seems like if enough people shout it loud enough and long enough, it becomes fact. But just like weapons of mass destruction, saying something loud enough doesn’t always make it so, no matter how much the intelligence community wants it to be that way.

I can appreciate your concern. I’m not saying Russia didn’t (or doesn’t) hack the U.S., but rather than regurgitate their “assessment” I want a little more verifiable evidence. I think we need to be careful that despite our understandable distaste of some political figures, we continue to question (and verify) the accuracy of what we’re being told.

Another reassuring observation is where he ells Jeremy to take heart it’ll be good business for the Intercept and alternative news outlets and to refrain
from announcing the sky is falling just yet.

It was clear the wise and “halls of power” savvy Hirsch respected Scahills craft advising that if Trump kicks any of the remaining actual investigative journalists off the top of his invite list (like he’s threatening to do with the DNC stenographers at CNN, MSNC, NYT and the Washington Post) they report about and continue their fight for the truth and justice.

you have to go to the RSS feed – I did comment on his Twitter announcement for this episode that they should put a direct download link on the episode page – if enough people tell him (and the rest of Intercept) this – perhaps they’ll catch on ;-/

I’m a big Naomi Klein fan, but overall, this podcast very disappointing. I was hoping for some non-bias fact-based reporting…sadly lacking here. This was just yet another round-table of people with the same opinion reinforcing their same opinion. Journalism is not about pushing your own agenda or your own personal opinion. It’s about reporting well-researched facts. And if you can’t report facts, then you’re just a hack–sorry–and you deserve the label ‘fake news’. Jeremy became very agitated simply because Sy said “We’ll see” (about Trump’s presidency), offering a shred of optimism instead of engaging in Trump bashing. Jeremy even aggressively tried to force his opinion on a Pulitzer Prize winning journalist. So much so that Sy, clearly annoyed with the antagonism, brought the interview to a close. Not great. Certainly not very tolerant of a different opinion. And Jeremy — try not to drop the F bomb on a worldwide media stream (I’m writing in from Singapore), it’s offensive some listeners. Trump has a lot of flaws, so much meat on the table, so why can’t ‘journalists’ get past the name calling and just do their job? Cue personal insults:

Sofia, I agree with your round table comments and would add that I was frustrated listening to the Hirsch interview. With the host talking over guest just as the guest was about to complete a thought, that thought was displaced and gone. Also the F bomb was discordant, jarring and unnecessary.

Terrific first segment! So glad you’re doing this. I’ve been following The Intercept for about a year now and am really excited that you guys have a podcast now. I shared with FB and would love it if you are eventually able to post full transcripts, both to use in my research and also so I can introduce FB posts with pull quotes. Keep up the great work! I’ll do all I can to get the word out.

I love the Intercept. Y’all are my go-to source for news and the stories you cover are so essential to our democracy.

I guess I was a little surprised and maybe disappointed in the first podcast though. I’m not sure what your aim was, but I felt that the majority of the time was devoted to the same talking points I’ve heard over and over again in the last days and weeks: How Trump is attacking the media, Women’s march = good, the surveillance state, etc. I feel like most people listening to the Intercept already have a grasp on these stories and we go here because you cover stories that the mainstream media doesn’t, and you provide good evidence and depth.

I did really enjoy hearing Hersh and Scahill talk about the DEA and NSA surveillance because that was very specific information that isn’t well known and I hope the podcast becomes directed more down this path.

In this discussion, I find it a bit disconcerting that the term “identity politics” was not once mentioned as contributing to the colossal failure of the democratic party in 2016. To the contrary, you all seem to be committed to the goal of further embracing and espousing the rhetoric of identity liberalism even when the likes of the NY Times has acknowledged its anachronistic distortions and innately narcissistic fixation on fringe issues.

Fifty years of ever evolving, socially progressive desiderata has been force fed to the American people – as if they were Skinnerian rats in a maze – with the intention of delegitimizing their collective identity. In not acknowledging the blowback that has now culminated in the status quo, the progressive left is just endeavoring to further create conditions that give rise to “popular” candidates like Trump. This is the problem of creating round tables of like minded people – they inevitably fall into the trap of reinforcing their own ideological bias even in the face of failure. The strengths and weaknesses of your collective worldview should be put to the test by engaging your opposition in civil discourse (Sam Harris would be a good start).

Question: Was the interview with Seymour Hersh edited or cut afterwards? I completely agree with Maeve that there were too many interruptions. Anyway, I was not familiar with Mr. Hersh, so thanks you for introducing him.

With regards to the protests and so on, I don’t see what their purpose is or how they are supposed to affect anything. Speaking Truth to Power does nothing as Power clearly doesn’t give a fuck about what those under its coercion think about it (more than ever with Trump). Those exercising power do what they want, and the weak suffer what they must.
Find out what power’s weak spot is, and hit it. People walking in the streets with signs isn’t it.

I am struck how the reaction of progressives mimic an addict confronted by an intervention. Anger, fear, denial, irrationality, fantasy all on display. Their addiction to power and agenda- and the resulting withdrawal in a Trump presidency, republican Congress, (soon to be) much more conservative judiciary- is in stark contrast to the “high” of 2008-10, when the democrats lorded over the country- which activities and agenda THEY advanced sowed the seeds of the present turnaround. And it’s no fluke…republican gains of over a THOUSAND seats in state legislatures under Obama and the caustic and divisive progressive philosophy should have given any astute political analyst a clue. But again, when in the throes of addiction, little else matters. The REAL issue here is how (if) progressives can become “relevant” again…I would suggest an emphasis on “conscience rights” ( maybe a great slogan like “conscience rights are human rights!) and a stepping away from the tawdry, banal and ultimately scientifically indefensible normalization/elevation of the LGBTQIA and pro-abort agendas. Become the party of the working class again, not an elitist group (remember the phrase “an effete corps of impudent snobs”?) bashing and dashing generations of moral, cultural and constitutional sensibilities…but I guess that is the REAL “cold turkey” that the dem party CAN’T undertake.

The (D)s (Congressional Senators an Representatives) are Kremlin Stooges unwittingly taking their orders from Vladimir (relaxed, unflappable, friendly, almost reassuring and certainly more statesmanlike) Putin. Our completely unknowing yet duly elected class of 435 “Siberian Candidates” continue spreading their delusional Russophobic (FAKE NEWS) propaganda around the world even while Iran is on the verge of building their VERY FIRST nuclear bomb.

Disappointed in this podcast. I turned it off after 10 minutes. Tired of hearing about “he lost the popular vote” and bigotry got him elected. All of the media pundits are complicating why Trump won. It is a simple answer – people voted with their wallets.

People saw their “Affordable Care Act” insurance premiums increase by 55% two months before the election. They see the cost of living outpacing their salary/wages by substantial margins. College education leaves people with mortgage sized debt with job opportunities that cannot begin to pay it off. These are the issues people considered when voting. Abortion rights/funding are way down on the list of reasons impacting peoples’ votes. People know that uncontrolled immigration will cost real money in jobs, salaries, and services to the illegals.

Abortion rights/funding are way down on the list of reasons impacting peoples’ votes.

That will end as we see that Trump, with a GOP Congress and GOP state legislatures, and Trump’s power to shape the federal courts, is the first real threat to abortion rights that is very possibly going to be successfully implemented.

Many who voted for Trump are waking up to how he can actually do what the GOP has been ranting about since Roe was decided in ’73. This time it’s no empty threat, and that is already making a difference as reality is dawning.

That Women’s March on his first day. That is a mere beginning. The scientists are planning to march on D.C. — scientists. And the women will be back. Protest, in the streets, is going to be intense.

The same “working class bigots” that elected Obama twice voted for Trump. It’s still about hope and change. They didn’t get the change they expected with Obama, and hope they will get it with Trump now.

As far as abortion goes, it will never be made illegal, even with the GOP mandate across the legislature and executive branches. Abortion has been legal since 1973. The toothpaste is out of the tube on this one. No congressman wants to deal with their constituents on voting either way on it. They all know it’s an issue to grandstand on, to look like they have a position, but it will never come to a vote.

Groups can march every day if they want, but Trump will still be President for the next 4 years. He’s not going to resign.

Thank you for interview with Seymour Hersh. It would have been a better interview, and one that I would want to share, if there’d been less of the interviewer’s insistent, sometimes strident, disquisitions, and fewer interruptions of Hersh.

As a regular reader of The Intercept I am happy you have added this podcast. I would like to address a couple of points discussed. I do not see Trump as an authoritarian so much as displaying Narcissistic Personality Disorder. He speaks of himself and his abilities in grandiose terms, he believes he is superior to others, he is obsessed with displaying his riches, he mocks others and cannot tolerate criticisms aimed at him. Once you read about the behaviors of NPD Trump’s behaviors become more understandable. In order to deal with a narcissist it is important to avoid power struggles. Narcissists thrive on confusion and delusion because it keeps them in power and redirects any blame. These power struggles are exactly what the news media has been feeding into. I am not criticizing because this is a more exaggerated style than journalists have had to deal with and the first things everyone had to come to terms with were, “Wow this guy lies”, “Wow he does not even flinch when confronted with facts” and finally “Wtf am I in the twilight zone, this can’t be happening!” The focus now needs to shift to how to avoid power struggles while still getting out the important information. We have to stop being incredulous towards his lying (though still exposing it) and focus on his actions and the resulting effects. At some point he and his lying will be gone, but the damage he is doing to the country will live on. Much of the techniques you will find online for dealing with power struggles are directed towards dealing with children. I find these are still appropriate for use with an adult narcissist.

Tired of hearing he didn’t win the popular vote.
Clinton won the popular vote by lousy 4.5% against a “buffoon”, “pig” “traitor” “Hitler” etc. That says more about Clinton than Trump.
If Clinton had won she would now be the least popular President ever instead of Trump, that’s all.
Perhaps Rome would not now be burning, but tell me it would not be longterm smoldering. Tell me a Trump, or worse, would not DEFINITELY be next.

It’s irrelevant whether he “lost” the popular vote. Fact is, he campaigned to win in the electoral college system that we have, which worked. She had fundraising dinners with wealthy donors while Trump stumped in the Rust Belt.

If the popular vote had mattered Trump’s campaign almost certainly would have adjusted accordingly.

The Democrats need to freakin’ get over all this whining about the popular vote, hysteria over Russia, and move over for actual progressives to fix things.

Dear Mona, Bernie Sanders really! A turncoat to the ideals and principles he first annunciated before shamefully joining the Hillary bandwagon. He is not to be trusted, an establishment democrat at the core. Please check out his positions in the senate in condoning and supporting US foreign policy war-making . Simply put, he is full of shit.

Personally I don’t care who is president; personally I am an anarchist….but I must point out you pro-Hillary vs anti-Trump converage. It is that point alone that allows me to see you bias. The Intercept is biased.
From my point of view you are a rebranded MSM..Talking heads..clearly Poitras dislike if not depises Trump. The Intercept is NOT ALTERNATIVE media. You are deluded if you think that…

McKay is obviously anti-Trump, he is still ‘The Guardian’.

So are all you female reporters. I would like to see a female President, but-just-not-any-female. A qualified female.
Feminism was the driving force for Hillary; truth be told. Hillary is a war criminal.
The popular vote was never an issue in the election the electoral college has always decided, and clearly Trump was the winner.
When did USA, the republic democracy become Maxist socialist.

The excessive pro DNC MSM coverage of trump was part if Hillary Clintons’ own “Pied Piper” strategy encouraging a Trump (the default populist candidate – but a potential DC institutional “circuit breaker” nonetheless) Candidacy even while she and hers were snuffing out Bernie (an actual socialist populist) Sanders insurgent candidacy. If Julian had dropped a dime sooner she would have lost to Bernie in the rust belt and all the regulars here know it. Or do they?

Torture never works
Torture wastes taxpayer dollars
You will do and say ANYTHING to get the pain to stop
Trump and Pompeo say that torture is a good thing. But neither one has the courage to publically volunteer on prime time TV and let themselves be waterboarded.
Torture leads to no valid information.
Since torture produces only lies, why are CIA subcontractors being paid to do this?
Torture is a recruiting tool for ISIS.
ISIS loves Trump.
If Trump says you’re a “terrorist”, you can put away and tortured forever in a CIA black site.
All Trump supporters are racists in mass denial.
Trump is mentally ill.

“The telescreen received and transmitted simultaneously. Any sound that Winston made, above the level of a very low whisper, would be picked up by it; moreover, so long as he remained within the field of vision which the metal plaque commanded, he could be seen as well as heard. There was of course no way of knowing whether you were being watched at any given moment. How often, or on what system, the Thought Police plugged in on any individual wire was guesswork. It was even conceivable that they watched everybody all the time. But at any rate they could plug into your wire whenever they wanted to. You had to live– did live, from habit that became instinct– in the assumption that every sound you made was overheard, and, except in darkness, every movement scrutinized.”

I just wish sumone wood look into the vile corruption murder drug dealing human trafficking problem that’s going on between the feds bci bia local police Dept sheriff’s Dept judges States attorneys and new town casino not to mention a plethora of trucking companys that have terrorized my great state since the first boom really all you have to do to c the corruption ispeel back the layers of money that have clouded so many people’s judgements cuz the money they made was good but how many wood be sickened to know the money there legitimate companies there working for are trafficking women and children committing murder trafficking large amounts of drugs out the backdoors while noones watching washing money thru new town casino working for the feds out of Langley busting who they want and training who they need to fill there pockets get away with the shams cuz there arrest reports are good but never looking at who the bad guys really are I beleive in Jesus Christ Lord and Savior a d I’m on his side it’s really sad to know that when God does come back the majority of the population will b on the other side of his wrath and not even knowing it cuz the money was good ……..god bless us all and pray for the thems cuz look around u and is the money really worth it

The elite Clintonite Democrats are the ones responsible for the rise of Trump. Their downfall is absolutely critical to the future of the progressive movement; they are like the Woodrow Wilson Democrats of a century ago – it wasn’t until FDR came along that things changed for the better, particularly with the domestic economy.

1) The abortion gag rule is a Democratic-Republican political football, like the whole abortion issue in general. It’s something that pro-Wall Street politicians from both parties can argue about in public while in private corporate Dems and Reps agree on policies that impoverish women at home and abroad: neoliberal trade policies that amplify domestic and international poverty in order to enrich a few elites.

2) Obama’s “climate initiatives” were mostly public relations affairs. Behind the scence he boosted fracking and offshore drilling, approved oil exports from the U.S., oversaw the BP Deepwater blowout (disaster capitalism), and promoted international oil development via massive Export-Import Bank funding. His biggest billionaire backer, Warren Buffett, is a big player in DAPL which is why the pipeline was quietly approved by his administration with no comprehensive environmental review. Clinton of course was on the same page, only more so. Trump is just the non-covert version of the same pro-fossil fuel agenda.

3) If you want to look at fascism in Nazi Germany, then the issue is alliance of state and corporate power – IG Farben dumping millions of marks into Nazi party coffers. The leading newspapers of the 1930s supported Nazi propaganda – and the analogy there is the NYTimes and Washington Post backing Bush regime change in Iraq and Clinton-Obama regime change in Libya and Syria. This analogy actually helps Trump, as he is in such direct conflict with the leading media organizations – i.e. Clinton’s close alliance with corporate media is closer to the fascist model, particularly with the pro-Cold War 2.0 agenda.

4) On the CIA: They’ve been running the drone assassination program – and as far as CIA black sites, there’s plenty of evidence that Obama just moved the black sites to U.S. naval vessels, which was reported on in 2013. The CIA’s record in Syria of backing ISIS and Al Qaeda and anyone else who’d go after Assad as part of the regime change agenda under Obama was a travesty, plus their support of the Cold War 2.0 with Russia agenda.

5) On the TPP: That’s one of the most undiscussed issues, that Obama’s tie-hard support of the TPP probably did more to cost Clinton (and TPP-supporter Kaine) the Rust Belt states than anything from the DNC or Podesta emails. That’s also why Bernie Sanders would have won all those Rust Belt states Clinton lost, and hence, the general election.

6) Trump’s policies will be a disaster for the domestic United States. His infrastructure and energy plans are ridiculous in the modern world, and will make the U.S. a world loser in the new renewable energy economy (except for California) that China and Germany will be leading. But, Hillary Clinton would have been a disaster for the whole world, with her ardent Cold War agenda and insane no-fly zone over Syria, her record of supporting the Iraq invasion and Libya and the Honduras coup, that should make it clear enough that her defeat was a win for global peace.

3) If you want to look at fascism in Nazi Germany, then the issue is alliance of state and corporate power – IG Farben dumping millions of marks into Nazi party coffers.

i cannot figure which party is least facist, or most.

4) On the CIA: They’ve been running the drone assassination program

JFK sought to prevent the CIA from engaging in military operations – and look what happened to him. Of course the all knowing CIA has no frikn clue. Neither did this Murder Inc agency have a clue about WMD which is curious since http://todayinclh.com/?event=new-york-times-exposes-cia-spying. And THEN NYT falls down on the job on WMD.

5) On the TPP: That’s one of the most undiscussed issues, that Obama’s tie-hard support of the TPP probably did more to cost Clinton (and TPP-supporter Kaine) the Rust Belt states than anything from the DNC or Podesta emails.

Astounding they never never never mention it. Not a mention. Like it’s POISON. As much poison as the murder of Seth Rich
BUT AGAIN,ACCESS DENIED

Just having finished the segment with those three, which covered the Women’s March, I agreed wholheartedly. The march was a largely spontaneous uprising of people from all over the country and even the world. It was not the purview of embittered Hillarybots and DNC estbalishmentarians in any way. They were there, but they were not the majority. (What, did people think the Bernie supporters just evaporated?)

Yes, as Jeremy noted, there were some “StillWithHer”” women represented, but not the majority. Indigenous women, women of color, and women like me who cannot abide Hillary Clinton were there. As the three also noted, neoliberal Democrats have never been weaker, while social democrats have never been stronger.

This first march was more a morale booster without a great deal of focus, but now it’s time to get organized and develop coherent messaging. Many more marches are in the offing, including one being planned by scientists: Scientists are organizing a march on Washington, D.C.

The one bright spot of Trump’s election is the re-emergence of fierce activism, in the streets. It’s past time to demand that the neoliberals get out of the way — and hopefully out of office — and let the actual progressives take over. Now there’s a very good opportunity to do that.

Great podcast, S. Hersh is the man. Subscribed and email link to friend. Like Hersh said, alternative media is going to do well under Trump. Unfortunately, because that means the MSM will continue to fail and more people get their news that way.

To see how pathetic the MSM print media is, read the comments section of the NY Times. The brain washing is complete, and the ones pushing back (often me) as not posted.

I always find Sy Hersch to be a breath of fresh air, and hope to hear more of him on future podcasts. I’d like to second the previous comments of not not letting your passion cause you to interrupt. Sy left a lot of things unsaid, because of the interruptions. That said, I’m a big fan of The Intercept, and appreciate all your indepth and empathy-filled investigative journalism. I look forward to hearing how your podcast unfolds.

A (Dutch) comic, that I used to read when I was 8 to 10 years old, was “Sjors and Sjimmie and the rebel club” (English equivalent: Perry and the Rinkydinks). How I loved that comic: Sjors and Sjimmie two smart (but not too smart) kids who established “the Rebel club”. They had many complex, hysterical, but humorous, adventures at home, school and on the streets. Not that they had it easy at home though as they were raised by a person who they called: “the colonel”: a very authoritative and not too nice person, who was often pranked by Sjors and Sjimmie, nevertheless.

And now Sjors and Sjimmie are replaced by, Jeremy and Naomi, Betsy and Glenn. The Colonel is Trump of course. And the rebel club is called “Intercepted”.

Super excited about this podcast.
News organizations have fail us since Bush war on terror. You have to find the real reporters. Top three news organizations care only about likes and little to no actual research. Your the only one that critized Obama. Keep being more or less nonpartisan.

Breathe, Jeremy. We desperately need calm, clear headed men and women working to report the facts and the truth. One of those facts is that millions of women and men have recently become actively engaged, politically and socially, with a genuine desire to know what the people and our government are doing in this country and around the world. They recognize that they can’t depend on government leadership or corporate media to report unbiased news. They are anxious to be well informed and act positively. You can help. You’ve done a tremendous job providing well researched, important information to date. So please, continue to investigate and report both the positive and negative facts and news with as objective a voice as you can muster. Grandstanding and cynicism are counterproductive. Don’t be baited into joining the fantasy world. The free press needs you well grounded in reality right now. Thank you for being a decent human being.

Naomi Klein hit it on the head. When the economy collapses (as it does regularly under capitalism), the right-wing will be convinced it’s the fault of some “other” that must be purged. That’s the way of all fascist gov’ts.

Meanwhile, the liberals waste time with gotcha takes about Trump’s lies. Trump doesn’t matter factually. Progressives need to put together their own narrative, like Bernie is.

Dem establishment media like MSNBC and the execrable serial failure Keith Olbermann are worse than worthless right now. They tell Dems they have no agency, that they are victims of a communist plot, which would be funny if it weren’t so dangerous.

I will admit I’m out of time [have let things go that catch up with me; go to bed early so I can get up EARLY…agreed with all that I heard before dropping off, missing Hersch…I think]. Stopping with this comment of Tom’s cause it reflects my feelings pretty well.

Listening to Hudson and reading Yves Smith, yes, I dare to give the guy some slack…not that Klein isn’t 100% right too. Ever since the great job exportations (along with concomitant exalting of symbolic analyst “service” jobs…financial services, etc)…so many, many, many people envision their purpose(s) as enlightening others. And they envision their own cerebral “service” as more important than hands-on-caregiving service–that’s the measure of the maya we’re in. Beyond all his craziness, it seems as though Trump’s own romanticized notion of his mission…is tied up with some kind of imaginary solidarity with auto builders. I oppose most of his policies, but I can’t fault him too much for his personal mythology…as evidently millions of Americans are wrapped up in similar so loosely they can deviate off into this Russophobic thing. We haven’t hung on to any dream; we’ve hung on to all these we-r-missionaries myths. Gotta hold on to whatever center there is, though–the Great Spirit loves each one of us. This truism has to be forgotten when we get so carried away with our own personal inflated missionary roles.

IMO The Intercept’s staying as close to the real center…a sane center after all…as any outfit out there.

You are so vital and important, and are so precious, these are scary times, I am being attacked because I am poor and sick. Don’t know if I want to live anymore. But, I love you guys, and thanks for being there! I admire you all, and the Damn Dems are just sick and spineless bowls of jello. Go after them too.

Of course for the neoliberal Intercept, the clock never struck 13 when Obama claimed the legal right to kill or detain anyone without judicial oversight, when he armed Nazi’s in the Ukraine, Jihadists in Syria, or when he transferred trillions to Wall street and protected them from prosecution. The Intercept has really become a neoliberal joke.

I am a member of the Green Party, and I think the Trump Administration is likely going to be even worse that the Obama Administration was partly because of many of Trump’s policies, and partly because of the people he and the GOP chose to fill his Cabinet.

And Scahill likely thinks similarly; after all, he wrote a lengthy book (Dirty Wars) about the bi-partisan crimes being committed in the so-called “war on terror”, he knows the Obama Administration was awful.

Your link is irrelevant. Where does the article talk about the 13th hour and the grave perils of Obama? You obviously don’t know what neoliberal means, since Obama personified that with his illegal wars and his transfer of trillions to Wall Street.

I think you need both silly putty and a therapy dog. You must have voted for that war criminal who took millions from Russian interests while SOS.

Regardless, your psychological states will not change the fact that a few months after Obama’s Nazi coup in the Ukraine, he appointed Joe Biden’s son, Hunter Biden, to the board of the largest gas company in the Ukraine. How is that for fascism and disaster capitalism?

Other than agreeing that Obama’s polices are neoliberal policies, nothing of what you said makes The Intercept anything close to a neoliberal supporting organization, despite this article not addressing your specific points.

That said, it sounds like we’d both like to see more specific reporting from reporters here on many of the same things.

If that’s the case, I encourage you to email the editor and reporters here from time to time and let them know. I have.

A quick search of any of those topics followed by the term “Intercept” will show that they were critical on all of those issues. You may want to brush up on your economics if you think the Intercept is neoliberal.
The first result of a Google of “Neoliberal Intercept” gives you this article.

Yes Jamie. Groupies refer to us as “trolls”, apparently be/ they cannot discern an argument from an opinion. You are indeed correct. BO was the grossest liar since LBJ, and that is saying A LOT. Never see it probed on Stepford Amy’s ADHD “progressive programming”, or anywhere. Greenwald BTW voted for GWB when pushing 35. Hum.. Your points are the most important, here, [except as Doug Valentine says], you failed to fully appreciate CIAmore Hersh’s attendance!

How about this commentary?
When you billionaire funded phony “leftists” take us down, for you are far more dangerous than those you label and falsely accuse of bigotry, [when after all false claims are all you’ve got since your “leadership” has got nothing done, except men can further harass female bathroom space..] A sickly superficial bunch not much different than “I feel your pain” Clinton BS. Let me just iterate — when your hopscotch takes us down YOU’RE GOING WITH US.

Excellent first episode. I subscribed! Just wanted to beg you Jeremy to please work on the aggressive interruptions and talking over your interview subjects. It makes your work harder to listen to. GG does it too, but this is your show, yes? Cringing as you steamroll Seymour H. & bark “DIDNT GEORGE BUSH DO THAT” at Betsey Reed.

I’m responding to the tone and intensity, specifically. It’s off-putting. Likely enthusiasm and strong beliefs–which I share 100%–but it comes across as turbo masculinity, and I know JS doesn’t intend it to be this way. Don’t be complicit, the Bro problem is real. It’s a podcast, so work on this please JS, and thanks for your amazing work.

Also what I thought. M.R. I get it Jeremy you are passionate, as I am as well, but…. it was a bit abrasive with the S. Hersh interview. No worries tho, I am so glad you are here and that I found you. Please, please keep up the good work, and so very interesting this 1st episode, hopefully with many more to come. Any chance you would have Snowden on??? Keep fighting to good fight I am right there with you.

Excellent job on the first full episode of the new podcast. Keep up the good work! What you are doing is more important now than ever. That spoken word performance from IT at the end about brought me to tears on my way into the office this morning. What is the source on that?